I have an HFS-100 and it's great. We regularly intercut with our EX1 with much success. We need some underwater shots and the HF-200 has a nice underwater camera housing made by Canon for it...the HFS-100 does not.
My question is, has anyone done a side by side comparison of the picture quality from both cameras? I realize the stills from the 200 will not be as good as the 100, but we are not interested in that feature...just the 1080p image quality.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Thanks, Craig

The hfs100 is a much more versatile camera. The hfs100 has manual gain, zebras, a focus wheel, ntsc color bars and tone, plus the hf200 has a 4mp 1/4'' cmos sensor while the the hfs100 has a 1/2.6 8mp sensor so the hfs100 will be alot sharper and will have a much shallower depth of field. Why don't you go with the hv30/40 (water housing exists for the hv30/40) even though it has a 1/2.7 sensor like the hfs100 it beats it slightly and the hf200 in low light because when you cram 8mp into the sensor you lose some low light performance. It is not major difference in fact I exchanged my hv30 for an hfs100 (mostly because of manual gain). I would never exchange it for an hf200 however though. Between the hv30 and hf200 I would definitely go for the hv30 because it also has a focus wheel, better low light, zebras, and bigger sensor. Hope that helped.

BTW sorry to sort of steal your post but since one of the negative of the hfs100 is that it has a mini advanced shoe instead of a full sized shoe like the hv series I will have to get an adapter. Will this adapter cut it http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...rToReadReviews.
Also if you use final cut and use avchd cams how long is the transcoding to prores by logging and transferring. Since I have an 8 core mac pro with 4gb of ram I believe it should be a lot faster than realtime capture. What machine do you have?
Finally, I believe a class 4 sdhc card is sufficient enough for 24mpbs recording, but when logging and transferring will a faster sdch card transcode faster while logging. BTW I will be connecting the cam through usb not a card reader.
Thanks

I can get you stills from the HF200. How should I deliver them? Post them here? In what resolution? As screen grabs, actual stills from camera mode?

Also, from the description your wrote Mayer, you have me rethinking my HF200 purchase. If a higher end camera gives more control to get better video image,... I'm interested. I bought my HF200 based on the great images I saw online from it, but sadly that was not my result.

I have a thread about this in the forum if you want to read my lament.

It will if you don't have much weight in the light or mic mounted on it. Reading the reviews some point out it is kind of light and flimsy. One reviewer uses it mounted on his HF11 so it should fit yours.

I would not go that route, though. For an on camera mic I use the DM-100 which works very well, otherwise I mount a Rode SVM or Rode VM on a stand in close but out of the frame or suspended above and forward of the talent by about 2' if I can keep it out of the frame.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mayer Chalom

Finally, I believe a class 4 sdhc card is sufficient enough for 24mpbs recording, but when logging and transferring will a faster sdch card transcode faster while logging. BTW I will be connecting the cam through usb not a card reader.
Thanks

With prices coming down a bit I would go Class (6) in SanDisk Extreme III. While your current cam may work OK on Class (4) should you succumb to the lure of the DSLR that also does HD video (in SDHC format) the slower card suffers from buffer over run as do some brands in Class (6) too. The Sandisk Extreme III keeps up just fine and could be used both in DSLR and camcorder so long as it is reformatted each time it is put in a different camera.

I use HF100s and the Canon T1i.

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...